I think fortnite did it right

Agreed...

"Microtransactions" and "done right" should not be in the same sentence ever for a game that you pay for. If it is F2P I get it. But when I pay a cost to buy a game that is like telling me, "you bought the car without an engine, the engine is extra".

If they're unobtrusive and people just want to use them to expedite their progress, who cares? My progress isn't hurt or enhanced by their inclusion, so it's such a nonissue.

Microtransactions are a part of the industry now. So I would say that not necessitating them is definitely done right. They're not going away.

If you really want to do away with them in a full priced game, then let a full priced game be a full priced game. By that, I mean, let's look at gen 6 consoles, the last generation without them. Those games were $50. Developers didn't need to sell nearly as much then to profit as they do now. So with that in mind, I wonder how much games would need to cost to keep the profitability consistent. People say things like, "the market is bigger now", but I might disagree; Japanese console market has contracted considerably and games are now being uniquely developed for each platform-- not necessarily by architecture, but performance differences and nuances features (e.g., VR or Switch).

That all being said, am I correct in suggesting you are okay with paying $80-120 (estimate) for your games instead of $60 + microtransactions that are so innocuous that you never know they're there? Where exactly are you personally willing to compromise? Because I don't think $60 with no other means of income on a game is fair to developers. And before you cite God of War as an example, Sony Santa Monica is not only a branch of the top grossing platform holder, but it's also not trying to pull itself out of the well the way Capcom is.

I definitely understand your stance but I wouldn't discredit this game for being great because of the micro-transactions. The game is very good. Definitely worth playing. But I hear ya, at least some of us have the patience to wait, and take a stronger stance against MTs. I salute you sir.. and not sarcastically.

You can buy extra red orbs and unlock things early. No need to do either of them though because the game dumps 20+k red orbs at you per mission. You'll be swimming in them forever.

just say you weren't gonna get it. obviously you didn't care that much.

IMO

6. DMC2 6/10
5. DMC4 7.5/10 (Hated Nero, repeat bosses, Dante was the saving grace but only about half the game)
4. DmC 7.5/10 (solid overall, some great ideas, meh story, dialog sucked, and the director almost killed DMC)
3. DMC1 8.5/10 (all around solid)
2. DMC5 9/10 (carried by Dante & Nero gameplay, I didn’t like V’s, Nero’s better but still not a fan)
1. DCM3 10/10 (chef’s kiss)

Well, it worked.

This nothingburger of a opinion article got a lot of views and comments.

WHAT!? who in their right mind would put 2 near the top (not at the bottom) unironically?
I think all of them are worth playing in their own right honestly, except 2 unless you REALLY want to experience the whole series.

Why is DmC last? Genuinely curious.

Dmc is far superior to DMC2 come on

Oh girl no. Come on now.

That's the franchise you want Capcom to revive? LOL

I wish they put all the money on Dino Crisis..